Official Green Lantern News & Discussion Thread - Part 10

Status
Not open for further replies.
Will Smith, Johnny Depp, whatever. Seriously, ask everyone you know. Ask you're grandma if she knows who George Clooney is. Ask that weird Indian dude you work with. The only edge Smith and Depp is is kids, and that's because Clooney isn't willing to stoop to their level for mega-super-duper "I got a billion" BS stardom, which only makes him cooler than both of them put together.

Remember when Johnny Depp was an exciting actor? Thanks, Pirates. Can I have back the guy who did Dead Man and Donnie Brasco now?
 
Will Smith, Johnny Depp, whatever. Seriously, ask everyone you know. Ask you're grandma if she knows who George Clooney is. Ask that weird Indian dude you work with. The only edge Smith and Depp is is kids, and that's because Clooney isn't willing to stoop to their level for mega-super-duper "I got a billion" BS stardom, which only makes him cooler than both of them put together.

Remember when Johnny Depp was an exciting actor? Thanks, Pirates. Can I have back the guy who did Dead Man and Donnie Brasco now?

Yes, Johnny Depp is clearly an unexciting actor.

Despite the fact that his latest movie just grossed more than Dark Knight worldwide.

And the Pirates franchise has made over 3 billion.

Clearly he's completely unexciting. No draw at all.
 
Clooney's biggest grossing films ever (The Ocean's trilogy and The Perfect Storm) came *after* B&R. None of them made more than $200 mil, since someone asked, but each of those 4 grossed substantially more than the $107 mil that B&R did. Clooney's star power is associated more with his offscreen life than his actual b.o., though --- pretty much the same with Angelina Jolie, for instance. He's the kind of guy who makes for regular cover fare for everything from The Enquirer to Entertainment Weekly to Time Magazine.

Ryan Reynolds, by comparison, doesn't have that luxury. Yes, he probably will be unfairly blamed for GL's lack of success ("failure" is too strong a word at this point), and yes, it will probably be a temporary setback in his career. I don't think it's going to end his career at all, though....I don't think *any* CBM, no matter how abysmal, has ended anyone's career.
 
Clooney's biggest grossing films ever (The Ocean's trilogy and The Perfect Storm) came *after* B&R. None of them made more than $200 mil, since someone asked, but each of those 4 grossed substantially more than the $107 mil that B&R did. Clooney's star power is associated more with his offscreen life than his actual b.o., though --- pretty much the same with Angelina Jolie, for instance. He's the kind of guy who makes for regular cover fare for everything from The Enquirer to Entertainment Weekly to Time Magazine.

Ryan Reynolds, by comparison, doesn't have that luxury. Yes, he probably will be unfairly blamed for GL's lack of success ("failure" is too strong a word at this point), and yes, it will probably be a temporary setback in his career. I don't think it's going to end his career at all, though....I don't think *any* CBM, no matter how abysmal, has ended anyone's career.

All 4 of the CLooney films you mentioned did more than 200

But Reynolds is gonna be fine. He has Safe House with Denzel and then he has RIPD. WOrse comes to worse he'll just stay mostly in comedy
 
Best case scenario is that GL doesn't kill other DC heroes.

Itself, though? Yeah, GL's dead on arrival.
 
Reynolds will be fine. Besides the comedy he's doing later on this year, he's doing a thriller with Denzel that comes out next year. And if Deadpool ever gets off the ground, that's another plus to his career if it's successful.
 
Clooney can do everything? any proof?

thanks

His filmography as producer and director is a good enough proof, IMHO. And he can even rejects roles like the Lone Ranger in a Bruckheimer movie.

@dark_b, remember, George Clooney is part of the Ocean's Eleven franchise, which did pretty well and like Antonello stated, he has directed as well as written screenplays and has received Academy nominations for both (rumor has it that he might get Oscar nominations for acting and directing for the films he has worked on this year). The guy can do it all pretty much.
 
The three Ocean's movies. And whether or not his movies make 200 million dollars doesn't have anything to do with him being able to do whatever he wants. Especially when what you want to do doesn't cost 200 million dollars.
i am talking about the budget.

was Clooney in a 200 million movie ?
 
People are talking about Reynolds career because some saw GL as his chance at ultimate superstardom.

I see. Well, I guess it's possible for him to have that chance again. Maybe RIPD will do that for him if it's really the new MIB.
 
This talk of Ryan Reynold's career being over is complete nonsense. I don't know a single person that doesn't know who Ryan Reynolds is, nor one who dislikes him. He's constantly talked about in magazines, Access Hollywood-type shows, and all that junk. It's not like execs will assume he's box office poison because he was in a bad movie. ****, he was in a TON of bad movies but WB definitely wanted him to an extent (obviously acting ability is a big factor as well) for the marquee value as he was popping up on all these "SEXIEST MAN ALIVE" lists, usually at number one.

Ryan Reynolds will be just fine, I'd be more upset for him about losing the ability to get with Scarlett Johannson.
 
Reynolds will be fine. Besides the comedy he's doing later on this year, he's doing a thriller with Denzel that comes out next year. And if Deadpool ever gets off the ground, that's another plus to his career if it's successful.

About Deadpool, the executives might reconsider Reynolds for the role after what happened with GL. I don't say it's a good thing, because as most of you have presented it, he's one of the good points of the movie (yeah still haven't seen it, comes out in August, a week before Captain America), but you never know...Fox is making it :woot:
 
About Deadpool, the executives might reconsider Reynolds for the role after what happened with GL. I don't say it's a good thing, because as most of you have presented it, he's one of the good points of the movie (yeah still haven't seen it, comes out in August, a week before Captain America), but you never know...Fox is making it :woot:

They should reconsider a Deadpool movie altogether....Ryan or no Ryan. I mean...Deadpool...a whole movie...? Really? Maybe as a major villain in another X-men movie or something, but a whole movie just on him is stretching it, I feel. It'd be like doing a solo movie on Banshee or Silver Samurai.
 
I doubt how GL did as much affect on Reyolds being Deadpool.
 
Routh probably won't ever get a lead role in a movie because, from what I've heard, when he isn't playing Superman he's pretty wooden.

He didn't exactly leap off the screen as Superman, either.
 
Anyone think Ryan's star power was an encumbrance to this film? Not for one moment did I actually get lost in the illusion that I thought "that's Hal Jordan". I consciously knew it was Ryan Reynolds at every frame.
 
Anyone think Ryan's star power was an encumbrance to this film? Not for one moment did I actually get lost in the illusion that I thought "that's Hal Jordan". I consciously knew it was Ryan Reynolds at every frame.

That's the way I felt about Nicholson as The Joker too...and for me, it took away from it. For that matter, one could say the same about RDJ as Stark/IM...but for many, that's one of the biggest things that made the movie as enjoyable as it was.
 
That's the way I felt about Nicholson as The Joker too...and for me, it took away from it. For that matter, one could say the same about RDJ as Stark/IM...but for many, that's one of the biggest things that made the movie as enjoyable as it was.
I guess the difference is that both of those are magnificent performances; Reynolds' not so much.
 
Well...some actors 'disappear' into their roles, like Daniel Day Lewis or Sean Penn, whereas others get their roles by being...themselves. With the latter, I guess it comes down to whether you like the idea of that role becoming that person. It's a big part of what attracts people to movies. I mean...when a movie with Cary Grant would come out, you can bet that most of the people going to see it were there to see...Cary Grant....whatever the actual name of the character was in whatever movie.
 
i am talking about the budget.

was Clooney in a 200 million movie ?

I don't think that's fair. There aren't that many films that have budgets that large, and films like "Superman Returns" and "Green Lantern" were not originally intended to be $200 million plus productions (the former was to be done for $185 million wile the latter was to be done for $150). You can attribute that to mismanagement (at the director, producer, and studio levels).
 
This talk of Ryan Reynold's career being over is complete nonsense. I don't know a single person that doesn't know who Ryan Reynolds is, nor one who dislikes him. He's constantly talked about in magazines, Access Hollywood-type shows, and all that junk. It's not like execs will assume he's box office poison because he was in a bad movie. ****, he was in a TON of bad movies but WB definitely wanted him to an extent (obviously acting ability is a big factor as well) for the marquee value as he was popping up on all these "SEXIEST MAN ALIVE" lists, usually at number one.

Ryan Reynolds will be just fine, I'd be more upset for him about losing the ability to get with Scarlett Johannson.

In EW they were saying how Reynolds was the best thing about the movie... it seems people like him just fine. It was the movie itself that is sorta lackluster.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,265
Messages
22,075,959
Members
45,876
Latest member
Pducklila
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"